Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2000/08/15/16:04:18
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Too many "changed behavior" entries are not very useful (what will you
> write next time when the behavior is changed?).
Hmm, haven't thought about that.
> @findex open AT r{, accepts @code{O_NOLINK} and @code{O_NOFOLLOW} flags}
Will change that. Also, it could be cool if this entry says that open()
supports symlinks now... Maybe the following will do there?
@findex open AT r{, accepts @code{O_NOLINK} and @code{O_NOFOLLOW} flags}
@findex open AT r{, supports symlinks}
> > int
> > open(const char* filename, int oflag, ...)
> > {
> > int fd, dmode, bintext, dont_have_share;
> > + char real_name[FILENAME_MAX + 1];
> > int should_create = (oflag & (O_CREAT | O_EXCL)) == (O_CREAT | O_EXCL);
> >
> > + /* Solve symlinks and honor O_NOLINK flag */
> > + if (oflag & O_NOLINK)
> > + strcpy(real_name, filename);
> > + else
> > + {
> > + if (!__solve_symlinks(filename, real_name))
> > + return -1; /* errno from from __solve_symlinks() */
> > + }
>
> Bother. __solve_symlinks doesn't have an FSEXT, does it?
No, it doesn't right now. I can't think of any reasonable reason
why user should intercept symlink resolving, any ideas there?
> So what
> does a file extension do if it wants to catch this new code?
FSEXT open handler will catch that later, in _open(), with symlinks
resolved. Is there anything wrong with this setup? Am I missing something?
> Also note that the special precautions that `open' takes not to fail
> in the case of a file that's open by another program on Windows, in
> this fragment:
[...]
> aren't in __solve_symlinks, sop `open' might fail inside
> __solve_symlinks in these cases.
In fact, readlink() is affected there, __solve_symlinks() does
all its job through it. I'll post a patch which adds this
precaution there too.
> Why not use `basename'?
Because I didn't know about its existence. I will switch to it.
> Don't you need to handle the case of "d:foo"?
I don't think so, because 'd:' cannot be a symlink in DOS.
> (If you do use `basename', you need to make a stub for it.)
Will do.
> Please put ELOOP inside @code{}.
Will fix.
Thanks for comments,
Laurynas
- Raw text -